Rajasthan High Court
Madan @ Madniya S/O Shri Modiya vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 February, 2021
Bench: Prakash Gupta, Chandra Kumar Songara
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 107/2021
Madan @ Madniya S/o Shri Modiya, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Todi Harmada Ps Harmada Dist. Jaipur Raj. At Present R/o Chhoti
Dungari Ps Kishangarh Renwal Tehsil Phulera Dist. Jaipur Raj. (At
Present In Central Jail Jaipur) Through His Wife Smt. Manudi
W/o Madan @ Madniya Aged About 38 Years R/o Todi Harmada
Ps Harmada Dist. Jaipur Raj. At Present R/o Chhoti Dungari Ps
Kishangarh Renwal Tehsil Phulera Dist. Jaipur Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home
Secretariat Jaipur
2. The Dist. Parole Advisory Committee, Through Its
Chairman Dist. Magistrate Jaipur Raj.
3. Superintendent, Central Jail Jaipur Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshuman Saxena
For Respondent(s) : Mr. javed Chaudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
02/02/2021
This parole petition has been filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India with the prayer that the petitioner be
released for 7 days parole under Rule 18 of the Rajashtan
Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958 (for short 'the Rules of
1958").
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was convicted by the trial court vide judgment dated
(2 of 3) [CRLW-107/2021]
27/9/2003 and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. The
petitioner filed a D.B. Criminal Appeal No.1485/2003 before this
Court against his conviction and sentence awarded by the trial
court which was dismissed. The petitioner filed an application for 7
days parole under Rule 18 of the Rules of 1958, before the District
Parole Advisory Committee, but the same has been rejected vide
order dated 17/9/2020 on the ground of adverse police report. He
further submits that the petitioner has served more than 11 years
6 months. Although SP, Jaipur (Rural) has not recommended to
release the petitioner on parole but Social Justice and
Empowerment Department has ordered to release the petitioner
on parole. Therefore, in view of Rule 18 of the Rajasthan Prisoners
(Release on Parole) Rules, 1958, the petitioner is entitled to be
released on parole of 7 days.
In the reply, it is submitted that the petitioner earlier
jumped parole therefore his case for parole has been rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully
perused the record.
The purpose of parole is to facilitate family ties being
maintained.
Needless to say that in case the petitioner engages
himself in any untoward incident during 7 days parole, same can
be withdrawn and the petitioner can be called upon to serve his
remaining sentence.
Considering the purpose of parole as also the period
already served by the petitioner, we deem it just and proper to
grant the petitioner 7 days parole.
(3 of 3) [CRLW-107/2021]
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the
impugned order dated 17/9/2020 qua the petitioner stands
quashed and set aside. We direct the concerned District Authority
to release the convict-petitioner on 7 days parole, subject to his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two
local sureties of Rs. 50,000/-each to the satisfaction of the
concerned District Magistrate with the stipulation that in case
during parole of 7 days, the petitioner commits any undesirable
activity, he can be called upon to serve his remaining sentence
and at the same time he shall also maintain peace and tranquility
during the parole period and will abide by any other condition
imposed by the authority concerned.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J (PRAKASH GUPTA),J
Om/Ashish Kumar /23
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
